Changed tactics behind higher army casualties in encounters

[Zarvan]

Soldiers stand guard near the encounter site in Pampore. (Waseem Andrabi/HT)
Three militants killed as Pampore encounter ends, LeT hand suspected

Army officials say one reason why the casualties have risen is that terrorists have refined their tactics and are striking targets where they can cause a high number of casualties, hold out for a long time against the security forces and create media hype.

“We can easily blow up a building and kill the terrorists but what about the collateral damage? So we have to strike a delicate balance and are willing to suffer casualties to save civilians,” Lieutenant General BS Jaswal, a former northern army commander, said.

The generally acceptable ratio of casualties between the army and terrorists is 1:10, though it can vary in cases of urban conflict. In a three-day operation at Pampore three army personnel and two CRPF jawans died while three terrorists were killed. In the Pathankot attack last month, seven security personnel, including Lt Col Niranjan Kumar of the National Security Guard, died while five terrorists were killed.

Officers said protecting civilians was the top priority in Pampore. “There were a lot of civilians in the building when the terrorists entered it. Our main focus was to evacuate them to safety. We launched a joint operation and used bullet-proof vehicles to evacuate 120 civilians from the building,” Major General Arvind Dutta, GoC, Victor Force, said after the operation.

A report in local daily Greater Kashmir said on Sunday that employees who were in the building, wishing not to be named, said the terrorists allowed them to leave.

Last year, 37 security personnel died in terrorist violence in Kashmir.

Changed tactics behind higher army casualties in encounters | analysis | Hindustan Times

 

[Tipu7]

The Militants in Kashmir do not target civilians. But they do use civilians in order to restrict the options Indian army have.
This is bit different from hostage situation but still it is very effective strategy.

 

[knight11]

The Militants in Kashmir do not target civilians. But they do use civilians in order to restrict the options Indian army have.
This is bit different from hostage situation but still it is very effective strategy.

Do you live in Kashmir that you know, they don't target civilians. So what they target :-

1. Collaborator who might be the civilian, who got suspicious of some suspicious activities in his village and reported to local police station.

2. Common shopkeeper, who happened to be on the wrong place, because terrorist bullets from the AK-47 flied over the security forces fails to ask the identity of him, whether he is a civilian or not or whether he is kashmiri or not.

3. A doctor, whose only son was abducted by the militants and demands money as the tokken of contribution in the holly war called Jihad against India.

4. A common man who happens to step on the anti-personal mine setup by the terrorist beside the road, meant for the passing convoy.

5. A common tourists, who came to the valley, hearing as the heaven on the earth, but terrorist kills him.

6. A common man whose shop got burned in the market due to some clashes, and he got heart attack thinking how he would feed his childrens.

7. A common old parents, whose single son, crosses the border to become the soldier in the quest of the Ajadi for the training, mind brainwashed, and with the tag of terrorist that will make sure, he won't be able to live in mainstream society afterward.

I can count hundereds of such incidence.

 

[Tipu7]

Do you live in Kashmir that you know, they don't target civilians. So what they target :-

1. Collaborator who might be the civilian, who got suspicious of some suspicious activities in his village and reported to local police station.

2. Common shopkeeper, who happened to be on the wrong place, because terrorist bullets from the AK-47 flied over the security forces fails to ask the identity of him, whether he is a civilian or not or whether he is kashmiri or not.

3. A doctor, whose only son was abducted by the militants and demands money as the tokken of contribution in the holly war called Jihad against India.

4. A common man who happens to step on the anti-personal mine setup by the terrorist beside the road, meant for the passing convoy.

5. A common tourists, who came to the valley, hearing as the heaven on the earth, but terrorist kills him.

6. A common man whose shop got burned in the market due to some clashes, and he got heart attack thinking how he would feed his childrens.

7. A common old parents, whose single son, crosses the border to become the soldier in the quest of the Ajadi for the training, mind brainwashed, and with the tag of terrorist that will make sure, he won't be able to live in mainstream society afterward.

I can count hundereds of such incidence.

wish I could answer your questions............ I don't want to create any trouble for myself.............

 

[ayesha.a]

The Militants in Kashmir do not target civilians.

Oh you have no idea, dear. The number of good people working in the civil administration that have been killed by insurgents is shocking. It was a favoured method of theirs at the height of the violence, before the Indian forces stabilized the region - brutally gun down anybody working in administrative capacities, so that others are terrified and quit their jobs, or fear to join. (It's called terrorism for a reason - terrifying people into doing what the insurgents want them to do.) The effect was that civil administration was impossible, and quality of life was abysmal, and therefore discontent was rife in the population. Thankfully, those days are far behind.

If you don't believe me, just use google to see how many village elders (sarpanch) have been assassinated. They used to be a favorite target for terrorists, because they are not too protected, and killing them plunges an entire village into disarray. Panchayat members were another juicy target.

A google search for "Kashmir sarpanch" yields results almost exclusively about one being gunned down.

The Militants in Kashmir do not target civilians. But they do use civilians in order to restrict the options Indian army have.
This is bit different from hostage situation but still it is very effective strategy.

Yes, there is a name for that tactic - "human shields". (It's a tactic, not a strategy.) It is specifically prohibited by all laws of war, including the Geneva conventions.

Human shield - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Kompromat]

If India ends military occupation of Muslims in Kashmir there would be no encounters to begin with. If you want to fix a problem, fix its rootcause which in this case is Hindu India's forceful occupation of a Muslim state which wants independence.

 

[ito]

What causalities? I guess after Phatankot attack, this is next high profile attack by Pakistan based LeT

 

[ayesha.a]

If India ends military occupation of Muslims in Kashmir there would be no encounters to begin with. If you want to fix a problem, fix its rootcause which in this case is Hindu India's forceful occupation of a Muslim state which wants independence.

How about Muslims and Hindus living together in one country, has that possibility ever occurred to you? You know, instead of classifying real estate as "Muslim lands" or "Hindu lands", simply live together and practice your religion?

I know that sounds like a ridiculous concept to you, but trust me, it's possible - it's happening.

And by the way, the level of participation of JK in the whole democratic process, right from grassroots level, belies your claim that the state itself wants independence. Two swallows doth not spring make, and a few separatists do not a state make.

(There was a lot of stupidities that India did vis-a-vis Kashmir. Going to the UN for arbitration and then not following up with its mandate was idiotic, and Pakistanis are justified in being angry about that. But that was all two generations ago. At this point, if you think India will let go of a very strategically important state after defending it all these years, or you think that a majority of people in JK still want to seperate from India, you would be wrong on both counts. That ship has sailed. It's not going to happen. Period.)

 

[chhota bheem]

If India ends military occupation of Muslims in Kashmir there would be no encounters to begin with. If you want to fix a problem, fix its rootcause which in this case is Hindu India's forceful occupation of a Muslim state which wants independence.

The rootcause is education and to make people understand its 21st century and not 7th century.and people cannt be based on religion and above all else all the religions are same.

 

[Tipu7]

Oh you have no idea, dear. The number of good people working in the civil administration that have been killed by insurgents is shocking. It was a favoured method of theirs at the height of the violence, before the Indian forces stabilized the region - brutally gun down anybody working in administrative capacities, so that others are terrified and quit their jobs, or fear to join. (It's called terrorism for a reason - terrifying people into doing what the insurgents want them to do.) The effect was that civil administration was impossible, and quality of life was abysmal, and therefore discontent was rife in the population. Thankfully, those days are far behind.

If you don't believe me, just use google to see how many village elders (sarpanch) have been assassinated. They used to be a favorite target for terrorists, because they are not too protected, and killing them plunges an entire village into disarray. Panchayat members were another juicy target.

A google search for "Kashmir sarpanch" yields results almost exclusively about one being gunned down.




Yes, there is a name for that tactic - "human shields". (It's a tactic, not a strategy.) It is specifically prohibited by all laws of war, including the Geneva conventions.

Human shield - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

plz compare Civilians death with army deaths in Militants attacks.................how many times Militants purely engaged civilians?
Slaughtered them?
Suicide attacks in public?
Attacks on schools, masjids, temples?
All I can see, that every time they hit the military............ Sign of Discipline and purity of goal they have.

As per killings of elders................ its a bit complex game.............
Lets assume

''Elders of a Village (who are willing to support army) are killed by army themselves.................... when they are no longer useful or when they are doing more bad then good''
Ofcourse you will moke this concept..........but think about it............
You need to give reasons to common people that Militants are their enemies, so what is the best way? Kill the elders, this will create fear+hate ................ manipulate these emotions and you have a whole village who is loyal to you and hostile towards Militants................. a very basic and simple tactic of intelligence agencies..............

(but since IA is army of gods so ofcourse you will never ever admit it) ....................

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

The rootcause is education and to make people understand its 21st century and not 7th century.and people cannt be based on religion and above all else all the religions are same.

The root cause in illegal Indian occupation and attrocities ranging from mass killings to gangrapes and kidnappings.. since 1947.. And in the past by dogra rulers.

 

[Vergennes]

Nothing about the equipment Indian soldiers are wearing ?

 

[Peshwa]

The Militants in Kashmir do not target civilians. But they do use civilians in order to restrict the options Indian army have.
This is bit different from hostage situation but still it is very effective strategy.

Its called a human shield

 

[chhota bheem]

The root cause in illegal Indian occupation and attrocities ranging from mass killings to gangrapes and kidnappings.. since 1947.. And in the past by dogra rulers.

When i said education,i dint mean the ability to read but i ment ability to understand.i hope you understood what i ment.
Kashmir has always been our land,you had your chance for getting it and as usual you guys messed it up and we got part of it and we are in no way giving it up.and anyone who has other ideas will be in an unmarked grave.
And you know thats what you do in Blauchistan.

 

[desimorty]

plz compare Civilians death with army deaths in Militants attacks.................how many times Militants purely engaged civilians?
Slaughtered them?
Suicide attacks in public?
Attacks on schools, masjids, temples?
All I can see, that every time they hit the military............ Sign of Discipline and purity of goal they have.

As per killings of elders................ its a bit complex game.............
Lets assume

''Elders of a Village (who are willing to support army) are killed by army themselves.................... when they are no longer useful or when they are doing more bad then good''
Ofcourse you will moke this concept..........but think about it............
You need to give reasons to common people that Militants are their enemies, so what is the best way? Kill the elders, this will create fear+hate ................ manipulate these emotions and you have a whole village who is loyal to you and hostile towards Militants................. a very basic and simple tactic of intelligence agencies..............

(but since IA is army of gods so ofcourse you will never ever admit it) ....................

Source: Changed tactics behind higher army casualties in encounters

The 40,000 causalities including civilian and militant started in early 1990s precisely the moment the USSR withdrew.
Pakistan pushed the Mujideens or mercenaries into Kashmir.
My advise to you. Learn about politics instead of pretending to know about things.
And they don't target civilians? The hostage situation, hijacks of airplanes etc.. not to mention gernade lobbying at civilans, sufi shrines etc..
Also the target killing of Hindus in Kashmir valley to change the demographics.
The difference from 1990 to know is that the militants are getting more desperate, because of lack of support from the Pakistan regime.
This is why Musharaf lives in London.

Nothing about the equipment Indian soldiers are wearing ?

Source: Changed tactics behind higher army casualties in encounters

Training is more important than equipment.